Thursday, October 27, 2005

Back To Basics

Congratulations to Accountancy Age for their misleading headline today.

On their front page, in a nice big blue box, they state that 65.7% of the ICAEW voted for the merger.

How can that be, if only 44% bothered to vote?

Speaking as a qualified accountant myself, I would say that the correct headline should read 29% voted in favour.

Still, why let facts get in the way of a good headline?

I am sure that there are a few of you reading this who, for a modest fee, would be happy to provide AA with a remedial course on basic mathematics and stats.

Those of you who wish to point out the error on their front page, should address your comments to


  1. If 56% of ICAEW membership could not be bothered to vote on such an important issue, they do not deserve to be included in the statistical population.

  2. Ken (my final post),

    Same article:

    (1) We have a sufficient mandate to continue to discuss consolidation.

    [The man is stark staring mad as well.]

    [Have him sectioned under The Mental Health Act or have him put down.]

    (2) Talks on CIPFA collaboration will continue.

    [Fine if the cost is less than £x per period.]

    (3) CIMA has kept the door open for a merger with ICAEW.

    [It's pretty cold in the Arctic.]

    (4) Anstee slammed ICAS.

    [Where did he slam them. Will ICAS give him a bloody nose (please).]

  3. On the other hand the NO votes WERE fixed at 19,322 so the YES votes required would have been 38,644 which exceeds the actual YES vote by 1,640.

    The above is an extract from my E-mail to the AA Editor yesterday.

  4. Sir,

    You quote variously '500 votes away' above the picture and 540 votes in the second paragraph of your 27/10/2005 main story.

    My E-mail, for the benefit of those who did not see AccountancyAge yesterday; began as above.